PITTSBURGH (KDKA) – Students at Carnegie Mellon say it’s freedom of expression, but the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh calls it inappropriate and disrespectful.
At an annual art school parade, a female student dressed up as the pope, and was naked from the waist down while she passed out condoms.
Even more, witnesses say the woman had shaved her pubic hair in the shape of a cross.
The Diocese has asked CMU to take action.
“I think we all know that when we’re growing up we do stupid things but to cross over the line in this instance shouldn’t happen with anybody,” Bishop David Zubik said.
CMU issued a statement, saying “We are continuing our review of the incident. If our community standards or laws were violated, we will take appropriate action.”
Some Carnegie Mellon students we talked with saw no need for discipline.
“It’s all in good fun and it’s not meant to harm anyone,” Ivy Kristov told KDKA’s Andy Sheehan.
Bishop Zubik says the incident must be addressed.
“What I do want to have happen is for this person to learn an important lesson,” Zubik said.
The University encourages individual thought and artistic expression but the Diocese believes this student not only crossed the line, but trampled all over it.
They are demanding some action.
Supposing it was a famous Imam instead, chances that CMU would need to do such a thorough "review" to determine whether religious bigotry and public nudity violates community standards and/or laws? Over or under 0%?
How is this different from people dressing up as leather nuns during Halloween in New Orleans? (Other than they are mostly nude and this woman was)?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Out of the blackness and stench of the engulfing swamp emerged a shimmering figure. Only the splattered armor and ichor-stained sword hinted at the unfathomable evil the knight had just laid waste.
Supposing it was a famous Imam instead, chances that CMU would need to do such a thorough "review" to determine whether religious bigotry and public nudity violates community standards and/or laws? Over or under 0%?
Anti christianity is the last acceptable prejudice.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
I am Anti-Christianity. And I do think that this is fine. It's art. The church needs to realize that their beliefs aren't laws. Disrespectful? Great. Is it against the law? Nope.
The church needs to realize that their beliefs aren't laws.
Yeah. It also shouldn't be like this massive lobby group, with such a strangehold or influence over society or even entertain such ideas. Heck, IMO, it shouldn't be such a massive group at all.
Disrespectful? Great.
I find that the Diocese's response just so damn absurd, and that this wasn't disrespectful as much as it was simply tongue-in-cheek and satirical, at most. The Diocese comes across as incredibly jejune yet so chauvinistic.
that this wasn't disrespectful as much as it was simply tongue-in-cheek and satirical, at most.
I don't think there's any reasonable way to interpret it as *not* disrespectful. You are certainly welcome to think being disrespectful is fine, but come on now... can you even come close to justifying it as not being disrespectful?
I am Anti-Christianity. And I do think that this is fine. It's art. The church needs to realize that their beliefs aren't laws. Disrespectful? Great. Is it against the law? Nope.
I was under the impression that public nudity is illegal. Even if it is a college student.
And people who are obviously invested in something will find things considerably more disrespectful than those who are not. Part of social progress in the U.S. today is understanding when something is disrespectful to another and trying to stop it, or at least having understanding about why it could be disrespectful. Not using your prejudices to say "Oh they just need to lighten up!"
I was under the impression that public nudity is illegal. Even if it is a college student.
And people who are obviously invested in something will find things considerably more disrespectful than those who are not. Part of social progress in the U.S. today is understanding when something is disrespectful to another and trying to stop it, or at least having understanding about why it could be disrespectful. Not using your prejudices to say "Oh they just need to lighten up!"
The other part of it is also understanding when it is OK to be "disrespectful" because not speaking out is worse.
Was this some sort of protest or was it done just to troll people?
I was under the impression that public nudity is illegal. Even if it is a college student.
So what's the issue, whether the person was naked or whether the conduct was offensive; to wit, whether this is legal or whether this is flagrant to 'the reasonable person'?
Exposing your genitalia, IIRC, is illegal except in Vermont where you sort of have to go beyond the call of duty to be charged with indecent exposure, lewd conduct, and the like.
The other part of it is also understanding when it is OK to be "disrespectful" because not speaking out is worse.
Was this some sort of protest or was it done just to troll people?
It was at a art parade at Carnegie Mellon University.
I would imagine it's a protest towards Christian (particularly Catholic and Fundamentalists because they're the strictest of the bunch) views of sexuality; or it could just be college kids trolling people because, well, college kids.
9909-
I don't actually have an issue with the intention, so long as it was meant to be constructive and not a troll attempt. If it was a form of protest, then go ahead! Protests are good, so long as they're not violent or seriously disrupt a person's daily routine. They bring attention to issues that may not be in the public conscious, and that's a good thing. However, it would be a little stupid to say Christian attitudes towards sexuality is not in the public conscious, so I suppose the protest seems a little pointless. More publicity to an already heavily publicized thing is a good thing I suppose?
I do have an issue with people not recognizing that it could, and apparently was, offensive to Christians. It was meant to be offensive; I would imagine that's why she made the point to shave her pubic hair to look like a cross.
But more than anything, I'm just sick of hypocrisy. That's about it.
Is this really much of a legal issue? It seems like it's more of a school discipline thing to me.
The incident involved a student at a catholic college in an event run by that college. As such, the student would be subject to whatever behavior guidelines the school might have (which presumably would parallel ideals of the Catholic faith). It would make sense to me that a Catholic school might wish to take some sort of disciplinary action against a student being partially nude at a school event, handing out condoms and mocking the pope.
Is this really much of a legal issue? It seems like it's more of a school discipline thing to me.
The incident involved a student at a catholic college in an event run by that college. As such, the student would be subject to whatever behavior guidelines the school might have (which presumably would parallel ideals of the Catholic faith). It would make sense to me that a Catholic school might wish to take some sort of disciplinary action against a student being partially nude at a school event, handing out condoms and mocking the pope.
I don't htink Carnegie Mellon is a Catholic school... I could be wrong though.
Is this really much of a legal issue? It seems like it's more of a school discipline thing to me.
The incident involved a student at a catholic college in an event run by that college. As such, the student would be subject to whatever behavior guidelines the school might have (which presumably would parallel ideals of the Catholic faith). It would make sense to me that a Catholic school might wish to take some sort of disciplinary action against a student being partially nude at a school event, handing out condoms and mocking the pope.
I did not think Carnegie Mellon was a Catholic College. Can anyone confirm or refute this?
Supposing it was a famous Imam instead, chances that CMU would need to do such a thorough "review" to determine whether religious bigotry and public nudity violates community standards and/or laws? Over or under 0%?
If it generated the same level of controversy, then sure.
I mean, isn't it silly to accuse the university of being religiously biased because they're investigating an incident to make sure that no laws were broken on their campus?
I am starting to believe that this is a hoax. With the proliferation of cell phone and digital cameras -- and the equal proliferation of social networks -- and there are no pictures of this woman to be found anywhere? Gimme a break.
You will actually find that racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia are all still accepted behaviours.
Oh boo-hoo, poor little we-are-only-70%-of-the-population-and-essentially-a-state-religion Christians.
So is your position that this protest was acceptable as long as it mocks something like Christianity, but woul be unacceptable if it mocked another religion? How do you draw the line between which religions or groups are ok to mock?
Personally, I am in favor of expansive free speech rights, so I think what this girl did should not be discouraged or punished. What bothers me, however, is that while this speech likely won't be censored, other types of speech would be.
Why should this girl be allowed to make fun of the pope, but not, say Mohammed? What if she had dressed up in a KKK uniform instead? Why should we only tolerate hate speech that we find "tasteful" or "in vogue?" If this girl wants to be anti-Christian or anti-Muslim or anti-gay or anti-white or anti-Swedish or anti-MTGSalvation she should have the freedom to be any of those things.
CMU's president released a statement on this today:
To the Carnegie Mellon Community:
I am writing to you about the incident that occurred during Spring Carnival, in which a student appeared in a parade partially nude and portraying herself as the Pope. This act was highly offensive and, as we have said, the university has been investigating the matter and following our procedures to determine if disciplinary action is warranted.
I had not intended to communicate with you again until our review process was complete, but in light of comments I have heard from people on and off campus, I have decided that an update is in order. In particular, some people seem to equate limited communication with no action, believing that the university is doing nothing, and somehow hoping that the issue will just go away. This is not the case, and those who know me and my administration should reject such ideas out of hand.
We have procedures for a reason: to protect both the university’s interests and those accused of violating our community standards or policies. We will take the time necessary to discharge our responsibility to treat those involved fairly.
While our process is still in motion and I cannot comment on or speculate about the resolution of the matter, I can apologize to those who took particular offense. I regret that this occurred, and I apologize to all who were offended by this, for religious or other reasons, and especially to those who witnessed this behavior.
Jared L. Cohon
President
---
So the university is treating it seriously, it would seem.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can we have Megiddo removed from the forum forever please?
i'm pretty sure i can find your ***** online within 3 minutes
Supposing it was a famous Imam instead, chances that CMU would need to do such a thorough "review" to determine whether religious bigotry and public nudity violates community standards and/or laws? Over or under 0%?
Anti christianity is the last acceptable prejudice.
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
"Well, duh, you can't be racist if you're black."
And who is this "we" you are talking about? Let me guess: you assume I'm christian, because I made a observation that isn't disparaging to christians.
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
My Mafia Stats - My Helpdesk
G Omnath, Locus of Mana U Arcum Dagsson BUG The Mimeoplasm GW Gaddock Teeg X Karn, Silver Golem
Yeah. It also shouldn't be like this massive lobby group, with such a strangehold or influence over society or even entertain such ideas. Heck, IMO, it shouldn't be such a massive group at all.
I find that the Diocese's response just so damn absurd, and that this wasn't disrespectful as much as it was simply tongue-in-cheek and satirical, at most. The Diocese comes across as incredibly jejune yet so chauvinistic.
I was actually hoping to see pics in the link. Oh well.
I don't think there's any reasonable way to interpret it as *not* disrespectful. You are certainly welcome to think being disrespectful is fine, but come on now... can you even come close to justifying it as not being disrespectful?
I was under the impression that public nudity is illegal. Even if it is a college student.
And people who are obviously invested in something will find things considerably more disrespectful than those who are not. Part of social progress in the U.S. today is understanding when something is disrespectful to another and trying to stop it, or at least having understanding about why it could be disrespectful. Not using your prejudices to say "Oh they just need to lighten up!"
The other part of it is also understanding when it is OK to be "disrespectful" because not speaking out is worse.
Was this some sort of protest or was it done just to troll people?
Exposing your genitalia, IIRC, is illegal except in Vermont where you sort of have to go beyond the call of duty to be charged with indecent exposure, lewd conduct, and the like.
There's no legal protection or right for conduct such as this, though.
Well, not the nudity.
It was at a art parade at Carnegie Mellon University.
I would imagine it's a protest towards Christian (particularly Catholic and Fundamentalists because they're the strictest of the bunch) views of sexuality; or it could just be college kids trolling people because, well, college kids.
9909-
I don't actually have an issue with the intention, so long as it was meant to be constructive and not a troll attempt. If it was a form of protest, then go ahead! Protests are good, so long as they're not violent or seriously disrupt a person's daily routine. They bring attention to issues that may not be in the public conscious, and that's a good thing. However, it would be a little stupid to say Christian attitudes towards sexuality is not in the public conscious, so I suppose the protest seems a little pointless. More publicity to an already heavily publicized thing is a good thing I suppose?
I do have an issue with people not recognizing that it could, and apparently was, offensive to Christians. It was meant to be offensive; I would imagine that's why she made the point to shave her pubic hair to look like a cross.
But more than anything, I'm just sick of hypocrisy. That's about it.
The incident involved a student at a catholic college in an event run by that college. As such, the student would be subject to whatever behavior guidelines the school might have (which presumably would parallel ideals of the Catholic faith). It would make sense to me that a Catholic school might wish to take some sort of disciplinary action against a student being partially nude at a school event, handing out condoms and mocking the pope.
I don't htink Carnegie Mellon is a Catholic school... I could be wrong though.
I did not think Carnegie Mellon was a Catholic College. Can anyone confirm or refute this?
Oh good, I wasn't the only one thinking that when clicking on the link
If it generated the same level of controversy, then sure.
I mean, isn't it silly to accuse the university of being religiously biased because they're investigating an incident to make sure that no laws were broken on their campus?
So is your position that this protest was acceptable as long as it mocks something like Christianity, but woul be unacceptable if it mocked another religion? How do you draw the line between which religions or groups are ok to mock?
Personally, I am in favor of expansive free speech rights, so I think what this girl did should not be discouraged or punished. What bothers me, however, is that while this speech likely won't be censored, other types of speech would be.
Why should this girl be allowed to make fun of the pope, but not, say Mohammed? What if she had dressed up in a KKK uniform instead? Why should we only tolerate hate speech that we find "tasteful" or "in vogue?" If this girl wants to be anti-Christian or anti-Muslim or anti-gay or anti-white or anti-Swedish or anti-MTGSalvation she should have the freedom to be any of those things.
We shouldn't just protect speech we agree with.
Well, for starters it's New Orleans.
To the Carnegie Mellon Community:
I am writing to you about the incident that occurred during Spring Carnival, in which a student appeared in a parade partially nude and portraying herself as the Pope. This act was highly offensive and, as we have said, the university has been investigating the matter and following our procedures to determine if disciplinary action is warranted.
I had not intended to communicate with you again until our review process was complete, but in light of comments I have heard from people on and off campus, I have decided that an update is in order. In particular, some people seem to equate limited communication with no action, believing that the university is doing nothing, and somehow hoping that the issue will just go away. This is not the case, and those who know me and my administration should reject such ideas out of hand.
We have procedures for a reason: to protect both the university’s interests and those accused of violating our community standards or policies. We will take the time necessary to discharge our responsibility to treat those involved fairly.
While our process is still in motion and I cannot comment on or speculate about the resolution of the matter, I can apologize to those who took particular offense. I regret that this occurred, and I apologize to all who were offended by this, for religious or other reasons, and especially to those who witnessed this behavior.
Jared L. Cohon
President
---
So the university is treating it seriously, it would seem.
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
Edit: Not trying to troll, but now realizing that statement could be extremely inflammatory. Please take it on face value.